(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Children's Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign central campus master plan"

378.77366 
Un3c 
cop. 3 




Central Campus Master Plan 









University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 



Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2013 



http://archive.org/details/universityofilliOOsasa 



University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 
Central Campus Master Plan 



CENTRAL CIRCULATION AND BOOKSTACKS 

The person borrowing this material is re- 
sponsible for its renewal or return before 
the Latest Date stamped below. You may 
be charged a minimum fee of $75.00 for 
each non-returned or lost item. 



Theft, mutilation, or deface 
causes for student disciplina 



library materials can be 
i. All materials owned by 
the University of Illinois Library are the property of the State 
of Illinois and are protected by Article 16B of iff/noil Criminal 
Low and Procedure. 

TO RENEW, CALL (217) 333-8400. 
University of Illinois Library at Urbana-Champaign 



DEC 3 HUB 



Illinois 



loria Jackson Bacon; 
in L. Gravenhorst; 
Ralph Crane Hahn; 
s P. Wolfe; 

versify 
\ampaign 



When renewing by phone, write new due date 
below previous due date. L162 



Sasaki Associates, Inc. 
64 Pleasant Street 
Watertown, MA 02165 



October 27, 1989 



na-Champaign 



Prepared for: 

The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois 

Members: 

Governor James R. Thompson, ex officio, Gloria Jackson Bacon; 

Kenneth R. Boyle; Judith Ann Calder; Susan L. Gravenhorst; 

James L. Evenson; Donald W. Grabowski; Ralph Crane Hahn; 

Nina T. Shepherd; Judith R. Reese; Charles P. Wolfe; 

Robert Scott Wylie. 

Stanley O. ikenberry, President of the University 

Morton W. Weir, Chancellor at Urbana-Champaign 



Prepared by: 
Sasaki Associates, Inc. 
64 Pleasant Street 
Watertown, MA 02165 

October 27, 1989 



TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 



Forward 


Executive Summary i 


Section I 


INTRODUCTION 


1 






Background of the Study 


1 






Summary of Recommendations 


1 


Section II 




EXISTING CONDITIONS 


5 






Study Area 


5 






Campus Structure and Character 


5 






Land Use 


12 






Building Use 


12 






Building Condition 


12 






Circulation and Parking 


16 






Utilities 


20 






Summary 


23 


Section III 




PROGRAM AND DESIGN OBJECTIVES 


25 






Master Plan Program 


25 






Design Objectives 


25 


Section IV 




MASTER PLAN 


29 






Land and Building Use 


29 






Circulation and Parking 


34 






Campus Structure and Character 


43 






Summary 




Section V 




DESIGN GUIDELINES 


47 






Architecture 


47 






Campus Landscape 


48 



LIST OF FIGURES Page 

Figure 1. Study Area 4 

2. Central Campus Zones 6 

3. Existing Campus Structure 7 

4. Historic Buildings 9 

5. Existing Campus Density 11 

6. Existing and Use 13 

7. Proportions of Land Use in StudyArea 14 

8. Existing Building Use 15 

9. Temporary Buildings 17 

10. Existing Automobile Access 18 

11. Existing Service Access 19 

12. Existing Parking Distribution 21 

13. Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Paths 22 

14. Master Plan 28 

15. Proposed Use Relationships 30 

16. Proposed Building Use 32 

17. Proposed Campus Density 35 

18. Program Accommodation 37 

19. Proposed Automobile Access 39 

20. Proposed Parking 41 

21. Proposed Campus Structure 44 



LIST OF TABLES 

Table 1. Master Plan Program 27 

2. Priority Program Parking Needs 42 

3. Long Range Parking Needs 42 



FOREWARD 



The first plan for the future growth of the University was prepared in 1905-1906 by C.H. Blackall, 
architect, and John Olmsted, landscape architect. The plan sited a proposed, new auditorium 
(Foellinger) as well as future buildings formally placed around a large green quadrangle. This 
main quadrangle was the core of the campus then and remains so even more strongly today. 

The Central Campus Master Plan, adopted by the University of Illinois Board of Trustees on 
November 9, 1989, will guide the growth and development of the central campus area into the 
twenty-first century. This plan provides for the accommodation of 2,228,000 gross square feet of 
new facilities. Undergraduate instruction, recognized as the primary land use in central campus, 
is proposed to be reinforced and strengthened in the area surrounding the Blackall and Olmsted 
main quadrangle design. The plan also identifies a site bridging California Street just west of 
Goodwin Avenue for a significant new, near-term Chemical and Life Sciences Laboratory. A 
recommended north-south sciences "corridor" is intended to link the north engineering campus 
to the south plant and animal sciences campus. Also proposed is the upgrading of the quality of 
landscape east and west of the main quadrangle by adding new green spaces, pedestrian malls 
and an extensive street tree planting program. 

Master plans are visionary development guidelines from which administrators can make 
informed decisions. They are, however, intended to be flexible to accommodate future changing 
requirements and resources. This plan, as its predecessors, will help our generation and those of 
the future to envision and build the optimum environment for learning. 

The Central Campus Master Plan boldly proposes future development while honoring our past. 
The challenge will be to translate this dream into rea 




Ikenberry 

of Illinois / 




,*' - 

Jtanley O/Ikenberry Morton W. Weir 

President J Chancellor 

University of Illinois / Urbana-Champaign Campus 



Central Campus Master Plan 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Intent 

Over the next 25 to 30 years the Central Campus of the University of Illinois at Urbana Cham- 
paign will undergo a building expansion totaling 2.2 million gross square feet. With 5.4 million 
gross square feet of University buildings currently located on the Central Campus, the new 
building program represents a 40% increase in space. 

The purpose of the Central Campus Master Plan is to provide a guide for campus growth. The 
plan provides a framework for fitting the expansion program into the fabric of the Central 
Campus in a way that builds upon existing patterns of land use, circulation, infrastructure, and 
open space, while making wise use of limited land resources. 



The Central Campus Today 

The Central Campus is a 207 acre area defined by Green Street on the north, Lincoln Avenue on 
the east, Gregory Drive on the South and Fourth Street on the west. It is occupied by university 
and non-university uses. Major university uses include The College of Liberal Arts and Sci- 
ences, The College of Fine and Applied Arts, The College of Communications, the Library, 
campus recreation facilities, administrative offices and student and staff residence halls and 
apartments. Non-university uses include fraternaties, sororities, commercial facilities, private 
rental housing and religious institutions. 

The Central Campus consists of three major physical areas; the LAS Core surrounding the 
Quadrangle; the East area between Mathews Avenue and Lincoln Avenue; and the West area 
between Wright Street and Fourth Street. The LAS Core is the functional and symbolic center 
of the campus. It is a vehicle free zone possessing the finest examples of buildings and park- 
like campus open spaces. 

The East and West areas consist of generally denser development than the LAS Core, and the 
pattern of buildings and spaces is more urban in character. The street grid provides the major 
organizing structure for the East and West areas, and the presence of the automobile often 
dominates the landscape. Potential for accommodating growth is greatest in the East area, 
where large contiguous properties in university ownership are available. The pattern of West 
area university land ownership is more fragmented, and large blocks of land are already 
occupied by stable non-university land uses. 



Proposed Development 

The changes envisioned for the Central Campus over the next several decades are significant in 
scope and meaning for the university. Unlike growth in the post-World War II era, the expan- 
sion is not a response to increasing enrollments. The need is for better, more consolidated 
facilites to meet existing deficiencies, to provide modern laboratories and scientific equipment, 
and to house a growing library. The near-term program of 1.2 million gross square feet is 
almost entirely a response to existing space deficiencies, while the mid- and long-range pro- 
gram need of 1 million gsf is primarily to provide for expansion in Chemical Sciences, Life 



Sciences and the Library. Of the total growth program, science-related facilites including 
facilities for Geology, the Natural History Museum, Chemistry and Life Sciences account for 
approximately 900,000 gsf, and Library for 750,000 gsf. 

Other planned facilities include space for the campus and university administrations, The Uni- 
versity of Illinois Foundation, university bookstore, the Executive Development Center, the 
Continuing Education Center, the World Heritage Museum, the Campus Recreation Facility, 
Dance Studio, International Programs and Studies, the Area Studies Center, the International 
Student Center, Japan House, the School of Social Work, the Graduate School of Library and In- 
formation Science, and a central chiller facility and electrical load distribution center. 



Master Plan Objectives 

The objectives of the Central Campus Master Plan are: 

• To develop a logical and efficient land and building use pattern that supports the 
activities and programs of users of the Central Campus. 

• To preserve and extend the quality of the pedestrian landscape of the Central Campus 
as typified by the area surrounding the Quadrangle. 

• To improve the landscape quality of campus streets. 

• To maintain and create coherent patterns of building size, density and character. 

• To give priority to the needs of pedestrian movement over those of automobiles and 
bicycles. Automobiles and bicycles should be accommodated in a way that is function- 
ally adequate but does not sacrifice the quality of the pedestrian experience or compro- 
mise required land and building use relationships. 

• To seek compatability with existing street and infrastructure systems. 

• Attempt to reduce parking demand, but to plan in physical terms to accommodate 
required faculty and staff parking on the Central Campus in a way that does not 
detract from the quality of the campus landscape. 

Master Plan Proposals 

The principal organizing ideas of the Central Campus Master Plan include the following: 

• Campus uses will be organized in a distinct set of use areas. The use areas are of 
adequate size to meet future space requirements and they are organized to establish 
appropriate use relationships. 

• The LAS Core; the center of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences and 
most undergraduate instruction; 

• The Sciences Corridor; 

• The Campus Resources Zone; 

• The Public-Related Uses Zone; 

• The Office and Commercial Zone 



Several streets will be closed to automobiles and converted to primarily pedestrian corri- 
dors: Mathews Avenue, Daniel Street from 6th to Wright, and California Street from 
Mathews to Lincoln. Other streets will be narrowed and relieved of parking to reduce con- 
gestion and improve pedestrian safety: Wright Street and Goodwin Avenue. 

Parking will be consolidated into perimeter lots and garages. This will increase user 
walking distances but preserve valuable interior campus sites for facilities requiring func- 
tional association with the LAS Core, and improve the appearance of the inner campus 
landscape. 

The expansion of major pedestrian and bicycle pathways will follow the existing pattern of 
organization. 

The existing landscape structure of the LAS Core and the design principles set forth by 
preceding generations are reaffirmed by the plan. 

Landscape improvements will be made to the existing streets east and west of the LAS 
Core to strengthen ties between these areas and the Core and improve landscape quality 
of campus streets. 



I. INTRODUCTION 



Background of Study 

The Central Campus Master Plan study was under- 
taken as part of the University of Illinois' effort to 
establish an updated physical plan for the Urbana- 
Champaign Campus. The Central Campus Master 
Plan is the third of four separate but linked planning 
efforts intended to yield a campus-wide master plan. 
The current master planning process began with the 
North Campus in December of 1985, was followed by 
the South Campus in 1986, and will be completed by 
the South Farms Master Plan scheduled for 1990. The 
Central Campus Master Plan is the first major plan- 
ning study of the central campus since the 1959-69 
Long Range Plan. The plan addresses issues of 
campus form, circulation and parking systems, and 
accommodation of facilities growth for the next 25 to 
30 years. 



Summary of Master Plan Recommendations 

The Organization and Facilities Accommodation - The 
master plan provides for the accommodation of 
2,228,000 gross square feet of new facilities in a pattern 
that builds upon and strengthens the existing pattern 
of Central Campus uses. The plan proposes that five 
basic zones be established as an organizational frame- 
work for land and building uses. 

• The LAS Core: the center of the College of 
Liberal Arts and Sciences and undergraduate 
instruction 

• The Sciences Corridor Zone 

• The Campus Resources Zone 

• The Public-Related Uses Zone 

• The Office and Commercial Zone 
See Proposed Use Relationships diagram. 

This organization recognizes undergraduate instruc- 
tion as a primary land use in the Central Campus and 
assigns high priority to achieving the required adja- 
cencies and proximities among LAS instructional, 
office and support facilities. Those requirements are 
achieved by clustering the facilities around the Quad- 
rangle in a zone referred to as the LAS Core. 
Along the east edge of the LAS Core, a Sciences 
corridor is proposed between Goodwin Avenue and 
Mathews Avenue and extending from Burrill Hall at 



the north to Bevier Hall at the south. The zone will 
accommodate chemical science and life science uses 
and serve as a bridge between physical sciences north 
of Green Street and plant and animal sciences south of 
Gregory Avenue. It is proposed that the present site 
of Staff and Student Housing on Green Street and 
Goodwin Avenue be reserved predominantly for 
interdisciplinary science uses such as the study of 
global change. 

To the south of the LAS Core the master plan identi- 
fies the east-west zone between Armory Street and 
Gregory Avenue as a "Campus Resources Zone" 
wherein the Library and other facilities with a cam- 
pus-wide service role will be located. 

The plan recommends that public-related uses, 
including the World Heritage Museum, Office of Ad- 
missions and Records, Executive Development Center 
and the Continuing Education Program be clustered 
east of Goodwin Avenue between Illinois Street and 
Oregon Street. This zone will have ready access and 
public exposure along Lincoln Avenue. 

Commercial uses and campus offices will continue to 
be located west of Wright Street between Green Street 
and Daniel Street. The new Campus Bookstore will be 
located in this zone on a prominent site at the intersec- 
tion of Wright Street and Daniel Street. There is also a 
recognized need to sustain commercial and other non- 
university uses east of the LAS Core and to integrate 
them into the fabric of University uses. 



Circulation - The master plan recommends that the 
existing pattern of streets, paths and bikeways in the 
Central Campus be maintained with the exception of 
several modifications proposed to enhance pedestrian 
movement and safety. Modifications include the 
conversion of Mathews Avenue between Green Street 
and Oregon Street from a public throughfare to a 
service lane providing parking and access to abutting 
properties; the closing of California Street east of 
Mathews Avenue to Lincoln Avenue; the closing of 
Daniel Street between 6th Street and Wright Street; the 
narrowing of Goodwin Avenue; and the removal of 
parking from, and the narrowing of, Wright Street. 
The maintenance of most of the existing street system 
allows for maximum accessibility, dispersal of vehicu- 
lar traffic, and minimum conflict between major utility 
corridors and new development. 



Campus Form - The master plan proposes that the 
existing physical structure of the Central Campus 
consisting of the street grid and main quadrangle area 
be reinforced by the development of an extensive 
street tree planting program and the affirmation and 
implementation of traditional landscape and building 
design principles associated with the area surrounding 
the Quadrangle. It is proposed that the quality and 
coherence of campus spaces be improved as a counter- 
point to increasing density of facilities and urbaniza- 
tion. 






\ a J 



I. 



in', i'ji ; 




J0 a 










i h 



' 



II. EXISTING CONDITIONS 



Study Area 

The central campus study area encompasses approxi- 
mately 207 acres, of which 130 are University-owned. 
(Figure 1). The study area extends from Green Street 
to Gregory Drive, north to south, and from Lincoln 
Avenue to Fourth Street, east to west. The quadrangle 
area between Mathews Avenue and Wright Street is 
the largest area of contiguous university ownership. 
The corporate boundary of Urbana and Champaign 
bisects the study area at Wright Street. In Champaign 
there are 67 acres and in Urbana there are 140 acres. 
Within the study area, the university owns 37% (24.61 
Acres) of the land in Champaign and 76% (106.3 
Acres) of the land in Urbana. The university-owned 
land in Champaign consists primarily of small and 
somewhat dispersed parcels, whereas the land owner- 
ship in Urbana is characterized by larger, consolidated 
parcels. 




The main Quadrangle looking towards Follinger 
Auditorium 




The lllini Union, a landmark building and main 
entrance to the campus on Green Street 



Campus Structure and Character 

Campus structure refers to the overall arrangement of 
buildings and open space. The Central Campus can be 
logically divided into three major zones: The Liberal 
Arts and Sciences (LAS) Core surrounding the Quad- 
rangle between Mathews Avenue and Wright Street, 
the area east of Mathews Avenue and the area West of 
Wright Street. (Figure 2). The two primary open 
space elements of the Central Campus are the Quad- 
rangle and the existing street corridors east and west 
of the Quadrangle. (Figure 3). Campus edges, cam- 
pus density and small scale pedestrian spaces are also 
important aspects of Central Campus form. 

The Liberal Arts and Sciences Core - The LAS Core is 
organized around the Quadrangle, a 400 foot wide by 
1000 foot long lawn area framed by a regular arrange- 
ment of trees and three to four story buildings. The 
Quadrangle is the most significant campus open space 
because of its central location, symbolic clarity and 
use. Smaller spaces between the buildings link the 
Quadrangle to surrounding streets. The north edge of 
the LAS Core along Green Street serves as a major 
entry to the campus. 

Multiple landmark buildings surround the Quad- 



J 



m 






mi 



05 

--Lr-ij 



!H f 


















o 
U 

< 





jaang )m8«m 








In 












anuaAv ujajuri 






anuaAV SMeqjB^j 












! 






r 7^lf'F : i1 ITT 






• 




3 

£ 
u 

bo 




A simple planting pallette for the main 
quadrangle 




Existing campus edge at Lincoln Avenue i 
weakly defined 




A well defined street corridor 



rangle, the most significant of which are the Foellinger 
Auditorium, the Illini Union and Altgeld Hall. Other 
buildings, including the English Building, Henry Ad- 
ministration Building, Noyes Laboratory, the Natural 
History Building, Davenport Hall and Lincoln Hall are 
also important works of architecture, and characterize 
the quadrangle area as one of the most coherent and 
enriching settings on campus. All of these buildings 
are different from one another in style; however, they 
share essential underlying form characteristics that 
cause them to be perceived as a unified ensemble. 
Perceptual emphasis is on the campus spaces defined 
by the buildings, as opposed to an overemphasis on 
the buildings themselves. Figure 4 illustrates campus 
buildings of historic significance as identified by the 
Campus Committee on Historic Sites. 

The consistency of the planting design further en- 
hances the quality of the Quadrangle. A simple 
palette of yew hedges, crabapples and oaks is ar- 
ranged in geometric patterns that reinforce the order 
of the buildings. This design was originally conceived 
at the turn of the century, and later refined and 
formalized in the 1920's by landscape architect Ver- 
ruchio Vitale in association with architects Charles 
Piatt and James White. It is a classical and restrained 
design that simultaneously creates an appropriate 
institutional scale and a mood of serenity. 

Street Corridors - To the east and west of the LAS Core, 
the campus is primarily organized by the street grid. 
(Figure 3). Buildings are typically oriented towards 
the streets and the areas behind and between build- 
ings are used for service or parking. With the excep- 
tion of the Krannert Center podium landscape and 
several small open spaces associated with residence 
halls, there are no significant campus open spaces. 

The area west of the LAS Core consists of blocks of 
fairly consistent size, and the streets are continuous. 
The grid continues uninterrupted into the surrounding 
community to the west. Only the Armory, at 5th 
Street, and the Library, at Wright Street interrupt the 
regular pattern of through streets. The area east of the 
LAS Core is made up of blocks of varying sizes and a 
less continuous street pattern. The Krannert Center on 
the California Street axis serves as a eastern limit of the 
built-up campus, with only parking and several 
loosely structured campus uses between it and Lincoln 
Avenue. A shift in the street grid at Lincoln Avenue 
limits the sense of continuity to the east and estab- 
lishes Lincoln Avenue as a major divider between the 















a 


r-XT 















- 



n 

m 9 



ii 

i 

3 






f 
























§i 




Discontinuous street edges detract from campus 
unity 




Awkward scale relationships detract from 
campus unity 




A high Quality small scale pedestrian space 




Informal landscape 



built-up campus and residential neighborhoods to the 
east. The existing sense of a campus edge along 
Lincoln Avenue is, however, weakly defined. 

The existing streets both east and west of the LAS Core 
vary considerably in spatial quality. Several street 
spaces are well defined, such as 5th Street between 
John Street and Chalmers Street, the east edge of 
Wright Street, Nevada Street, Mathews Avenue 
between Green Street and California Street, and the 
street edges surrounding the Krannert Center for the 
Performing Arts. Most of these streets are defined by 
consistent buildings and tree planting that enhance the 
sense of campus unity and continuity. 

Typically, however, most streets east and west of the 
quadrangle lack the design consistency required to 
develop a sense that the campus extends from the 
Quadrangle to areas beyond Wright Street and 
Mathews Avenue. The incremental growth of the 
campus into former residential areas east and west of 
the quadrangle has created awkward scale relation- 
ships between large institutional buildings and the 
smaller residences that remain. Clearing land for 
parking has left a patchwork of remaining structures 
and open lots, and street trees are missing from the 
majority of streets in the study area. 

Campus Density - Figure 5 shows the existing pattern of 
building density for the Central Campus. The west 
area has a generally even density of development 
defined by medium to large buildings between two 
and four stories high and two to four structures per 
one side of a block. Several tall buildings, such as the 
Psychology Building and Illini Tower, are exceptions 
to this pattern. The area east of the LAS Core has 
relatively large and more frequent contrasts in density. 
This results in a more fragmented building pattern on 
this side of campus. The overall density of the Central 
Campus represented as a floor area to land area ratio 
is approximately .95. 

Small Pedestrian Spaces - A number of small courtyards 
and informal landscapes exist in the Central Campus, 
and contribute to its pedestrian character. The Diana 
Fountain in the west entry courtyard to the Illini 
Union and the Centennial Court between Noyes 
Laboratory and the Chemistry Annex are examples of 
successful plaza spaces; and the landscapes between 
English and Lincoln, and between Davenport and 
Foreign Language are examples of successful informal 
landscapes. Outside of the LAS Core, these kinds of 
outdoor spaces currently do not exist, and opportuni- 
ties for pleasant pedestrian spaces are not developed. 



10 



























-* 




ro 




• 




r^ 






o u 


n [— ] 



TTTT 



^ Pi 






□ ¥□ 

























* 






i 
n 























Jj 



4p D [ 



JT' - 
]]§□[ 












id 



P4 

3 



CD 



ON 



ft 













CO 












n 



c 
Q 

l 

bo 

.s 



Land Use 

The Central Campus study area includes a variety of 
land uses including Academic and Research, Adminis- 
trative Offices, Commercial, University and Non- 
University Housing, Recreation, Parking, and Institu- 
tions. Figure 6 illustrates the locations of these uses, 
and Figure 7 shows the proportions of land that each 
use occupies. 

In general the Central Campus land use pattern is 
logically ordered; however, the contiguous expansion 
of academic and research uses is somewhat con- 
strained by existing non-academic uses to the east and 
west of the LAS Core. West of the LAS Core major 
expansion is further limited by the dispersed owner- 
ship pattern. East of the LAS Core, the Krannert 
Center constitutes the major obstacle to eastward 
expansion of academic and research uses associated 
with the Colleges of Liberal Arts and Sciences. 



Building Use 

The primary users of the Central Campus are the 
Library, the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, the 
College of Fine and Applied Arts, and the College of 
Communications. The Central Campus is also home 
to offices for the university and campus administra- 
tions, several campus residence halls and apartments, 
recreation facilities, and a number of graduate pro- 
grams. See Figure 8. 

Most colleges and departments in the Central Campus 
experience some degree of dispersal among offices, 
classrooms and laboratory space, however; dispersal is 
a serious problem in the departments of chemistry, life 
sciences and mathematics, and in the Office of Admis- 
sions and Records. Several uses located in buildings 
on the Quadrangle could be considered for relocation 
in the future to allow for consolidation and contiguous 
expansion within the College of Liberal Arts and 
Sciences. These uses include the World Heritage Mu- 
seum, the University of Illinois Foundation, campus 
and university administration and the College of 
Communications. 



Building Condition 

Most of the building space in the Central Campus is in 
relatively good condition and supports the uses 
housed. Harker Hall and the Natural History Building 



12 









^ •■■■'-- — 1 




as 



: ™ 






x 





TT 




" — p 















t::r:t^rrui;: 


* — -i-»» -^ — . — | — L — 


r.f ' rf| It'" 








r ;; 



' ' ===== 


M 




I 1 i 1 

< i < £ 



Non-Univ. Institu tonal 

20.5 Acres 
12.22% 



Non-Univ. Residential 

9.9 Acres 

5.90% 



Non-Univ. Commercial 

11.2 Acres 
6.68% 



Parking 

14.8 Acres 
8.83% 




Academic and Research 

59.8 Acres 
35.6% 



University Related Uses 

1 .5 Acres 



Student Service 

5.4 Acres 

3.22% 

Administrative 

4.8 Acres 
3.22% 



Total area in land use categories = 167.7 acres 
Road right of ways not shown in chart = 36.3 acres 



Proportions of Land Use in Study Area 

Figure 7 




r" 




□ 


tf 


□ 




D 


□ 


n CD 


D 


r*4=> 




[ > 


k° 


two 









QDQGocD 



&.^u 




,1 


■ 












IFT Tgl ; 




D 

.r 

CO 



I ! 



« i 



DBD 



E g < 3 

j & E < 



15 



are in need of major repairs and renovation. The 
Student and Staff Housing facility at Goodwin Avenue 
and Green Street also has been identified as being near 
the end of its useful life, and ready for either major 
renovation or removal. Figure 9 illustrates buildings 
that the Office of Facility Planning and Management 
considers to be temporary and potential candidates for 
future removal. 



Circulation and Parking 

Automobile Access and Circulation - The road system of 
the Central Campus consists primarily of local streets 
that serve the campus community (Figure 10). Loads 
on these streets typically range from 500 to 2,000 ve- 
hicles per day except for Gregory Drive, Goodwin 
Avenue, Fourth Street, Sixth Street and Wright Street 
which serve as local collectors with volumes between 
4,000 and 9,000 vehicles per day. Green Street and 
Lincoln Avenue are major arterial streets serving both 
the campus and surrounding communities. These ar- 
terial streets carry 9,900, 17,100, and 11,400 vehicles 
daily respectively. In general, the road system pro- 
vides a high level of service for the Central Campus 
area. Much of the traffic congestion that does occur is 
attributable to mid-day conflicts between vehicles and 
pedestrians, rather than the inability of the roadway 
links and intersections to handle automobile volumes. 
Peak hour traffic that does not coincide with major 
mid-day class changes is handled at a high level of 
service by the existing road system. 




Existing surface parking lots detract from the 
visual quality of the campus 



Service Access - Service access to Central Campus 
facilities is provided from the existing street system. 
(Figure 11). Larger facilities such as the Illini Union 
and Krannent Center have substantial off-street 
service areas. The buildings surrounding the Quad- 
rangle present problems in providing service access 
because all four sides of the buildings are typically 
available for pedestrian access. This makes conceal- 
ment and separation of service activities difficult to 
accomplish and limits the manuvering area available 
for service vehicles. 

Parking - Automobile parking is a major land use in 
the Central Campus, occupying nearly 10 percent of 
the land. Most parking is in surface lots that detract 
from the visual quality of the campus. (Figure 12). 
There is an existing shortage of faculty and staff 
parking of approximately 375 spaces on the west side 
of the Central Campus. Presently, the campus policy 



if, 



;■ i 




- 



C3 a UD i ^_*¥ 






* 






■ d 









fro 







1 


■I 

] [ 










Czi 









| 
1 

CO 

I 



o 

6 

H 



17 




< 



IK 




I 




-- 



Hf&^b L 

1 




I 

I 

a r 
I 1 



19 



is to approach the parking deficit and inner-campus 
traffic congestion by attempting to limit the number of 
automobiles entering and parking in the Central 
Campus. The policy is supported by a trial program 
that includes the following features: subsidized MTD 
passes for faculty, students and staff; car pooling and 
ride-share incentives; remote and regional lot parking 
alternatives; and increased permit rates for close-in 
parking lots. 

Bicycle and Pedestrian Circulation - Existing bicycle 
paths in the Central Campus provide a logical net- 
work for movement both north and south, and east 
and west. (Figure 13). The two major north-south 
routes are located on Wright Street and Mathews 
Avenue, and the east-west routes are located on Green 
Street, Daniel-California Street and along the Armory 
Street axis. Bicycle parking lots are generally well 
located in concealed locations along the perimeter of 
the Quadrangle and at major destination buildings. 

Existing pedestrian paths are likewise organized as an 
efficient extension of the street grid. The system 
provides adequate surfaces for existing volumes of 
traffic and is an easy system to comprehend and orient 
oneself to. Major north-south pedestrian ways include 
Wright Street, the Broadwalks on the quadrangle, and 
Mathews Avenue. Primary east-west routes are Green 
Street, Illinois Street, Daniel-California Street and the 
Armory Street axis. 

Existing problems with the bicycle and pedestrian 
systems are not major planning and routing issues, but 
involve the details of path intersections, geometry and 
crossings with automobile roadways. 



Utilities 

The utility systems for the Central Campus generally 
follow the street grid, minimizing potential conflicts 
between new facilities and existing utility lines. Major 
concentrations and trunk lines are located in Sixth 
Street, Wright Street, Mathews Avenue, Armory 
Avenue and Gregory Street. 

There is a need to locate a new electrical load distribu- 
tion center and a new central chiller facility east of the 
LAS Core. The lack of additional capacity in the 
existing steam distribution system has been identified 
as a limiting factor to growth on the east side of the 
Central Campus, and a campus utility master plan is 
underway to explore solutions to this problem. 



20 






■ 













1 










eSi 




D n L 



mSu M 


m 

ha- 



5oi: 






B I 



r ■ 












.K 



^ 






1 

D 
bo 



H 

s 

Ph 

.s 



In 



1 & 

S f 



-r 





; __a j 


















1 
1 
1 

1 


) CH- 1 


1 




1 


^_^, 


i 


n 

— . Id. a 



QD 















a" 






D 


□ 


r-'j 



Li n □ 

~~1D 

a 



qz: 



fin 



QDQDoe 







■2- ,i 







_ 






i nra 





D D r 






t — 





a □ [ 









a 



L-Po, 

DO i _! 




a....! 







(ll 












,0 



PL 



: — , 




Oh 



I 






e 



22 



Summary 

The existing organization and character of the Central 
Campus provides an orderly and useful framework in 
which to accommodate campus growth. The LAS 
Core around the Quadrangle is a valuable and beauti- 
ful open space that provides a functional and symbolic 
center for the campus. Areas to the east and west of 
the LAS Core are less planned, and are not easily 
identified as part of the campus. Parking, utilities and 
meeting desired use adjacencies are significant issues 
that will determine the form of the Master Plan. 



23 



III. MASTER PLAN PROGRAM AND 
DESIGN OBJECTIVES 



Master Plan Program 

The proposed expansion program for the Central 
Campus includes a total of 2,228,000 gross square feet 
(gsf) of new space in the next 25 to 30 years (Table 1). 
This constitutes a 40 percent increase over existing 
Central Campus facilities. The proposed expansion is 
needed for several reasons. First, to meet existing 
space deficiencies, which accounts for nearly one-half 
of the total proposed program. Second, to house new 
technological equipment and laboratories, and an 
expanding library. And third, to consolidate pro- 
grams that now suffer the inefficiencies of scattered 
facilities. 

Enrollment increases are not projected and are, 
therefore, not the stimulus to growth. The proposed 
expansion program is based on the need for better 
facilities to accomplish the university's mission. Of 
the total 2.2 million gsf program, 900,000 gsf repre- 
sents growth in the sciences and 750,000 gsf in the 
Library. Together these two groups account for 75 
percent of the entire growth program. 



Design Objectives 

The general goal of the master plan is to fit the pro- 
posed program into the existing fabric of the Central 
Campus in a way that builds upon and reinforces 
existing patterns of land use, circulation, infrastructure 
and space organization while making wise use of 
limited land resources. In addition a number of 
specific objectives describe the intent of the Master 
Plan: 

• To develop a logical and efficient land and 
building use pattern that supports the activi- 
ties and programs of users of the Central 
Campus. 

• To preserve and extend the quality of the 
pedestrian landscape of the Central Campus 
as typified by the area surrounding the 
Quadrangle. 

• To improve the landscape quality of campus 
streets. 



25 



• To maintain and create coherent patterns of 
building size, density and character. 

• To give priority to the needs of pedestrian 
movement over those of automobiles and 
bicycles. Automobiles and bicycles should be 
accommodated in a way that is functionally 
adequate but does not sacrifice the quality of 
the pedestrian experience or compromise 
required land and building use relationships. 

• To seek compatability between the organiza- 
tion of new facilities and the existing street 
and infrastructure systems. 

• Attempt to reduce parking demand, but to 
plan in physical terms to accommodate 
required faculty and staff parking on the 
Central Campus in a way that does not detract 
from the quality of the campus landscape. 

• To recognize and be responsive to the needs 
of non-university property owners in the 
Central Campus. 



26 



TABLE 1 - MASTER PLAN PROGRAM 



Program Summary Table 

I. Near Term 

II. Mid Term 
III. Long-Term 
TOTAL 



NSF 

852,380 

329,000 

395,000 

1,576,380 



GSF 

1,210,500 

467,500 

550,000 

2,228,000 



I. Near Term 

Administration Building Addition 

Adminstration and Records Building 

Campus Administration Office Building 

University of Illinois Foundation Building 

Campus Service Facility 

University Bookstore 

Police and Public Safety Bldg. 

Executive Development Center 

Continuing Education Center 

World Heritage Museum 

Natural History Museum 

Central Campus Recreation Structure II 

International Programs 

Area Studies Center 

International Student Center 

WILL-TV Building 

Japan House-Kabuki Theatre 

Social Work Building 

Library Science Building 

Special Collections Library 

Library 7th Stack Addition 

Main Library Addition SW I 

Geology 

Chemical /Life Sciences Building 

Chiller Facility and Dist. Center #7 



NSF 

40,000 

23,000 

40,000 

16,000 

64,000* 

45,000 

10,000 

20,000 

25,000 

36,600 

60,000 

18,000 

11,000 

13,000 

18,100 

30,000* 

14,000 

15,000 

14,000 

100,000 
80,000 
67,000 
40,000 

137,680 
9,000 



GSF 

60,000 
35,000 
65,000 
25,000 
96,375* 
50,000 
15,000 
30,000 
37,500 
50,000 
80,000 
20,000 
16,000 
19,000 
25,000 
50,000* 
20,000 
25,000 
20,000 
120,000 
100,000 
100,000 
60,000 
225,000 
13,000 



TOTAL 



852,380 



1,210,500 



II. Mid-Term 

Library 8th Stack Addition 

Main Library NW Addition 

Central Campus Recreation Structure 

Continuing Education Center II 

Chemical Science Laboratory II 

Life Science Laboratory II 

Dance Studio II 



NSF 
80,000 
33,000 
18,000 
25,000 
100,000 
65,000 
8,000 



GSF 

100,000 
50,000 
20,000 
37,500 
150,000 
100,000 
10,000 



TOTAL 



329,000 



467,500 



III. Long-Term 

Special Collections II 
Library 9th Stack Addition 
Main Library Addition SW II 
Life Science Laboratory III 
Chemical Science Laboratory 



NSF 

65,000 

80,000 

50,000 

100,000 

100,000 



GSF 

80,000 
100,000 

70,000 
150,000 
150,000 



TOTAL 



395,000 



550,000 



Not included in total. Not to be located in Central Campus study area. 



27 




""" ^' 7 



^n 



28 



IV. MASTER PLAN 



The Central Campus Master Plan proposes the clarifi- 
cation and extension of the sound base of planning 
that has been established since the turn of the century. 
In this sense, it is not a plan calling for a radical 
change of campus form. The plan locates proposed 
uses in a pattern that builds upon the existing organi- 
zation of uses. Vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian circula- 
tion systems follow the existing circulation network, 
and campus form seeks to amplify the positive quali- 
ties of the existing setting under conditions of increas- 
ing density and urbanization. Figure 14 illustrates the 
Master Plan. 



Land and Building Use 

The Master Plan proposes an organization of uses that 
supports the activities of the various user groups of 
the Central Campus, clarifies use relationships, and 
consolidates related uses into a set of development 
zones. The land and building use pattern is deter- 
mined primarily by the need for logical adjacencies of 
uses, the need for most uses to be in close proximity to 
the LAS Core area, and the availability of building 
sites. The demand of most uses to be near the LAS 
Core results in an increase in the density surrounding 
the LAS Core, and a growth pattern that is character- 
ized by infill within the existing campus form. 

Figure 15 illustrates the use zones in which expanson 
will be organized, and Figure 16 shows specific build- 
ing uses. 

The LAS Core - A central idea of the plan is the affima- 
tion of the LAS Core as the center of undergraduate 
teaching and home to the College of Liberal Arts and 
Sciences (LAS). The Master Plan does not propose ad- 
ditional academic space be built in this zone in fore- 
seeable future. Rather, required space for the College 
of Liberal Arts and Sciences in the LAS Core will be 
achieved by relocating uses that do not require a 
Quadrangle location to other sites. Such uses include 
the World Heritage Museum, the Geology Depart- 
ment, the Natural History Museum and chemical and 
life sciences uses that will move to the new Chemical 
and Life Sciences Building east of the quadrangle. In 
the long range, it is conceivable that other uses, such 
as administrative offices and the University of Illinois 



29 



' 




3 



1 






h 









w 



2 S 








. ; •. 






30 



Foundation, could also be relocated away from the 
LAS Core as required by the future space demands for 
instructional space. The plan identifies an expansion 
to the Henry Administration Building for administra- 
tive offices, and two sites for future capacity for 
unidentified long-range uses beyond the range of this 
master plan. One of these sites is an expansion to 
Gregory Hall, and the other an expansion of Daven- 
port Hall. The Davenport Hall expansion would 
require razing the present east addition to that build- 
ing. 

The Sciences Corridor - A concentration of chemical and 
life science uses will be located east of the LAS Core, 
between Mathews Avenue and Goodwin Avenue, and 
spanning from Burrill Hall to Bevier Hall. The "Sci- 
ence Corridor" locates laboratory and teaching uses in 
close proximity to the LAS Core and creates a link 
between material sciences north of Green Street, and 
animal and plant sciences south of Gregory Drive. 
The first projects to be undertaken in this zone will be 
the Phase I Chemical and Life Sciences Building and a 
new central chiller and load distribution facility. The 
Chemical and Life Sciences Building will be 225,000 
gsf and will span California Street, facing Goodwin 
Avenue. The chiller will be located on the corner of 
Mathews Avenue and Oregon Street as an extension of 
Roger Adams Laboratory. 

Interdisciplinary Sciences Zone - To the north-east of the 
Sciences Corridor, the existing Student and Staff 
Apartments site is identified as the location for the 
Geology Department, the Natural History Museum, 
and an additional 250,000 gsf of long-range science ex- 
pansion. Geology and the Natural History Museum 
are in new buildings along Illinois Street and would 
not require the razing of the existing apartments. The 
long-range expansion may relate to interdisciplinary 
studies created by the overlapping interests of tradi- 
tional scientific disciplines. One emerging area being 
considered as suitable for this location is the study of 
global change. 

Campus Resources Zone - Major expansion of Library 
facilities will occur south of the LAS Core to the east 
and west of the Main Library. Along with existing 
facilities, such as the Armory, Freer Gym, and the 
Campus Recreation Facility, this will establish zone of 
campus resources between Armory Avenue and 
Gregory Drive that will serve academic units to the 
north and south. The plan relocates the Office of 
Instructional Resources and the Graduate School of 



31 



■ 



•• " ■ ' 

. Z ' - ' ' 

I " ] 




s 



I 

1 



I&-J !{» 



IS' 



: • 



32 



Library and Information Science in the Armory. A 
Special Collections Library is proposed immediately 
west of Bevier Hall. Contiguous expansion of the 
campus recreation facility to the south is accommo- 
dated in the plan. 

Public-Related Use Zone - In response to the existing 
location of the Krannert Center for the Performing 
Arts and the accessibility afforded by Lincoln Avenue, 
a zone of public-related facilities is located east of the 
Krannert Center. California Street will be closed to 
Lincoln Avenue to create a large block containing the 
Executive Development Center, the Continuing 
Education Program, the Office of Admissions and 
Records, and the World Heritage Museum. Beyond 
this program, there is capacity in this block for a 20,000 
gsf expansion of the Levis Center and an additional 
130,000 to 175,000 gsf of building area. To the north 
and south of this block, there is another 200,000 gsf of 
long-range capacity and space for two major parking 
garages. The block defined by Oregon, Lincoln, 
Nevada and Gregory is a potential site for a campus 
emergency services facility, including campus police 
and fire departments. 

South of the Krannert Center, Japan House and 
Kabuki Theatre are located adjacent to the Music 
Building. In the long-term, it is anticipated that dance 
and the band also will be located in this block as they 
are displaced from their present locations by other 
uses. Two small pavilions on the east side of the 
Krannert podium are identified as long-term capacity 
for uses related to the College of Fine and Applied 
Arts or Krannert Center operations. 

Office and Commercial Zone - The existing configuration 
of office and commercial uses in the Campus-town 
area, west of the Illini Union will be reinforced by the 
master plan. A new campus bookstore and office 
building is located at the corner of Wright Street and 
Daniel Street. The building will extend across to Sixth 
Street and may potentially link to the Swanlund 
Administration Building. Ultimately, the existing 
commercial uses along Daniel Street would be re- 
moved for academic-related expansion. The commer- 
cial property on Daniel Street is, however, not re- 
quired to accommodate the master plan's 25 to 30 year 
program. 

A new parking garage is proposed along John Street 
between Fifth and Sixth Streets. This facility would 
ideally include a retail use on the first floor along the 
John Street frontage. 



33 



With the long-range increase in campus facilities on 
the east side of the Quadrangle, it is recognized that 
commercial services will be needed in that area. The 
master plan process identified the need for a more 
detailed study to identify the types, amount, and 
preferred locations for commercial uses east of the 
Quadrangle so that a coherent plan, responsive to 
market conditions, can be made. 

Density - Accommodation of the master plan program 
in the above described use pattern results in a 40 
percent increase of building space for the Central 
Campus. Expressed as a ratio of floor area to land 
area, the increase is from a .95 FAR (floor area ratio) to 
1.35 for the Central Campus as a whole. The most 
concentrated areas of development in the sciences 
corridor achieve an FAR of over 4. 

Phasing and Capacity - The Master Plan Program has 
been divided into three phases based on anticipated 
need of facilities. (Table 1; Figure 17). The near-term 
program consists of facilities that are needed immedi- 
ately to remedy space deficits. Near-term facilities 
amount to 1,210,500 gsf, more than half of the total 
program need. 

Mid-term facilities are those estimated to be required 
in 10 to 15 years, and long-term facilities, those in 25 to 
30 years. The majority of these facilities are related to 
the library (40 percent) and Chemistry and Life 
Sciences (55 percent). 

Beyond the total 2,228,000 gsf of facilities in all phases 
of the Master Plan Program, an additional 1.1 million 
gsf of capacity has been identified within the Central 
Campus area. The realization of the Master Plan 
Program plus the additional capacity would represent 
a total growth of 3.3 million gsf and a 60 percent 
increase over the existing 5.4 million gsf of the Central 
Campus. 



Circulation and Parking 

Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation - The Master Plan 
assigns the highest priority to pedestrian circulation as 
the preferred means of travel on the Central Campus. 
No major structural changes are made in the existing 
pedestrian and bicycle path systems; however, several 
significant improvements are proposed. The Daniel 
Street and California Street axis is recognized as a 
major pedestrian and bicycle route. Daniel Street 



34 




! 
— 1> 









5 L 2 

ft FS 

. .^« - - : ' ' - •=»■■ ■ - 



i 



C D 



* 1 






rn$ 












I I 



9 



a c 
I 



— — _ 






— — — - i 



i! 






_ 



— 



, 



lit 






wmm—mmmmmmmm 



J2^ 



-4 









c 

D 



35 



between Sixth Street and Wright Street, and California 
Street between Mathews Avenue and Goodwin 
Avenue would be closed to automobile traffic and 
redesigned as pedestrian and bicycle malls similar in 
character to the centennial plaza between Noyes Labo- 
ratory and the Chemistry Annex. 

Mathews Avenue will be closed during weekdays to 
all except service and emergency vehicles and week- 
end parkers related to adjacent uses. This will effec- 
tively expand the present vehicle-free campus zone by 
nearly 50 percent, and establish Goodwin Avenue as 
the vehicle edge of the campus east of the Quad. 

The closing of California Street east of the Krannert 
Center will also create a large vehicle-free block be- 
tween Illinois Street and Oregon Street. The develop- 
ment of this block would be accompanied by the de- 
velopment of Gregory Street as an important pedes- 
trian and bicycle spine connecting this area to the 
north and south. 

Automobile Circulation - The expansion program, while 
considerable in terms of new space, does not generate 
significant increases in traffic volume or significant 
redistribution of traffic flows that would require major 
alterations to the roadway system. Various scenerios 
for closing and redirecting traffic on Wright Street 
were explored during the Master Planning process. 
These studies revealed that while these measures 
would be feasible, no major advantages to traffic flow 
or pedestrian safety would be realized. The proposed 
parking garages are provided with access and egress 
on local streets so that traffic flows between garages 
and major collectors such as Green Street, Lincoln 
Avenue and Fourth Street will occur in a way that is 
similar to how surface lots presently relate to the 
collector streets via local service streets that serve to 
disperse traffic before it reaches the collectors. 

The Master Plan proposes several measures to increase 
pedestrian safety and the pedestrian character of the 
Central Campus, but no major street changes that 
would affect the traffic capacity of the Central Cam- 
pus. Changes include: (Figure 18) closing sections of 
Daniel and California Streets; narrowing of Wright 
Street to remove parking from both sides of the street 
for most of its length; narrowing Mathews Avenue to 
a service lane and closing it to all traffic except for 
service and emergency vehicles and weekend parking 
for adjacent uses; and narrowing Goodwin Avenue. 
The Goodwin Avenue narrowing will not require 



36 




u 

D 



I B § 

| I 1 

- S K 

I I I 



^ Z 2 



DIDQ 



37 



removal of parking, however; in the long term it 
would be desireable to remove most parking from 
Goodwin Avenue. Removing the parking would 
reduce congestion along this campus-edge street, and 
would assume that adequate parking could be pro- 
vided elsewhere for commercial enterprises in the 
Goodwin Avenue area. 

The Master Plan provides for the continuation and 
enhancement of bus transportation for intra-campus 
travel, including travel to and from regional and 
remote parking lots and the Urbana-Champaign 
community. As parking is gradually removed from 
the inner campus, bus transportation will become an 
increasingly important means of maintaining an 
efficient campus circulation system. 

Service access to campus buildings is organized to 
minimize access points on major collector streets and 
limit conflicts with pedestrian access to buildings. No 
major changes of service access are proposed for exist- 
ing buildings. Because the Campus Bookstore is on a 
relatively tight site and has a heavy delivery function 
it is recommended that the service docks be inside the 
building. 

Parking - With respect to parking, the long-range goal 
of the plan is to remove parking from academic and 
research use areas of the campus to perimeter loca- 
tions and minimize its effects on the visual quality of 
the campus. The preferred approach to parking is to 
reduce the demand for close-in parking by continuing 
the program of incentives introduced in the fall of 1989 
to bus, car-pool and park in remote and regional lots. 
To the extent this program is successful, campus funds 
will not need to be devoted to expensive parking 
structures, parking lots and garages will not usurp a 
diminishing land resource, and parking will have less 
effect on the visual character of the campus. 

An alternative approach is to accommodate parking 
needs in the Central Campus, assuming demand 
cannot be significantly reduced. The Master Plan has 
taken this approach to determine its feasibility and 
define it as a fallback position in the event that the 
demand for close-in parking remains at current 
projected levels. 

Tables 2 and 3 summarize the Central Campus park- 
ing space needs for faculty and staff. Assuming that 
the needs will be met by providing parking on the 
Central Campus, Figure 19 illustrates where parking 
would be located. 



38 




u 

I 



5 .S 
I I 

! I 



39 



Table 2 shows the parking need for the program most 
likely to be realized in the next three to five years. 
This program includes the bookstore - office building, 
the central chiller facility and the Phase I Chemical 
and Life Sciences Building. The priority program does 
not generate a large number of new required spaces; 
however, exiting deficits and displacements create a 
signifigant need. To meet the need for the west side 
(Zone C), a 750-car garage would be built on Fifth 
Street between Armory and Chalmers, and 100 surface 
spaces would be built on John Street between Fifth 
and Sixth Streets. For the east side (Zone D), 111 new 
surface spaces would be built; 75 at the corner of 
Lincoln Avenue and Green Street, and 36 at the 
southeast corner of Oregon Street and Gregory Street. 

Table 3 shows the long-range needs for Central 
Campus parking. Meeting this need on the Central 
Campus would require the construction of an addi- 
tional 500-car garage on John Street between Fifth and 
Sixth Streets, and a new 1,000-car garage on Lincoln 
Avenue between Oregon and Nevada streets. 

The construction of facilities beyond the Master Plan 
Program would further eliminate surface parking and 
probably require the construction of an additional 
garage. The site at the northwest corner of Lincoln 
Avenue and Illinois Street is a likely location for the 
additional garage. (Figure 19, Figure 20). 

The plan calls for the location of all garages toward the 
perimeter of the campus to prevent garages and lots 
from becoming obstacles to adademic and research 
expansion. Perimeter lots will increase walking 
distances for most parkers by the time the long-range 
program is realized. No walking distances will exceed 
1,700 feet, or 10 minutes walk from car to the Quad- 
rangle. 

To enhance the quality of the campus street environ- 
ment, it is recommended that, where possible, non- 
parking uses occupy the ground level of parking 
structures. 



40 



■ 







§■» 









By 

tffppo 



Q 




<7i B. in 

I 



41 



TABLE 2 - PRIORITY PROGRAM PARKING NEEDS 



Zone C (West) 



Zone D (East) 



Existing Deficit 

New spaces needed by 1991 
in accordance with South 
Campus Master Plan, for 
South Campus parkers. 

New spaces needed to 
replace displaced spaces.* 

New spaces required by 
new program. 



324 
318 



169 



59 



99 



Total new spaces required 



870 



99 



* Does not include displaced metered spaces on streets. 



TABLE 3 - LONG RANGE PARKING NEEDS 



Zone C (West) 



Zone D (East) 



Displaced spaces 

New spaces required 
by new program 



282 
82 



413 
396 



Total new spaces required 



364 



809 



42 



Campus Structure and Character 

The basic components of the spatial form of the 
Central Campus are the Quadrangle and the street 
grid, (Figure 21). The Master Plan advocates amplifi- 
cation and clarification of the two components 
through the following measures: the reaffirmation of 
design principles related to landscape design in the 
LAS Core; reinforcement of the major pedestrian 
corridors; a major street tree planting program; control 
of building placement; and recognition of the Krannert 
Center podium as an open space resource. 

Landscape Design Principles for the LAS Core - During 
two separate periods of the campus history, landscape 
architects were retained to provide campus landscape 
master plans. The first was Ferruchio Vitale in the 
1920s, during a period of rapid growth following 
World War I; the second was Hideo Sasaki in the 1960s 
at the advent of the Dutch Elm disease that decimated 
the campus landscape. Both of these men set forth 
landscape design principles that have guided land- 
scape development in the LAS Core area and beyond. 




The character of Centennial Plaza will extend 
from Sixth Street to Goodwin Avenue 




The site for a formal oval garden in accordance 
with the 1919 Vitale Plan 



The Central Campus Master Plan recommends that 
the basic principles established by Vitale and Sasaki be 
reaffirmed as operational guidelines for landscape 
design in the Central Campus. A list of these prin- 
ciples is in Section V of this report. 

Reinforcement of Major Pedestrian Corridors - To estab- 
lish a hierarchy of importance among campus circula- 
tion routes, it is recommended that major pedestrian 
corridors be developed with appropriate landscape 
emphasis (Figure 21). The corridors are the Daniel - 
California Street axis, the Armory Street axis, the 
Gregory Street axis, and Mathews Avenue. With the 
exception of Gregory Street, these pedestrian paths 
now serve as major movement corridors; however, 
their landscapes tend to be discontinuous. The Master 
Plan proposes that pavements and plantings along 
these routes be improved to establish them as orderly 
corridor spaces that tie the campus together. 

The Daniel - California Street axis is identified as the 
major mid-campus cross axis and is proposed to 
assume the character of a generous pedestrian mall, 
similar to the Centennial Plaza, and to extend from 
Sixth Street to the Krannert Center. 

The Armory Street axis requires new tree planting to 
create a stronger collonade effect. The ambiguous area 



43 




In 



I I 



um 



44 




The east side of Gregory Street will be planted 
similar to the Krannert edge 




The Krannert edge: a colonnade of trees 




The broadwalks should be planted with compat- 
able species of oak 




The orderly strength of the broadwalk Elms, 1945 



behind Focllinger Auditorium is proposed as the site 
for a formal oval garden, a detail from the 1929 Vitale 
plan. 

Gregory Street will become an important pedestrian 
corridor as uses are developed east of Krannert 
Center. Tree planting along the east side of Gregory 
Street will be similar to the double row of trees along 
the Krannert Center perimeter. At the Levis Center, 
the path will shift to the east of the Illinois Street 
Residence Hall and proceed north across Green Street. 

Mathews Avenue will be narrowed, and restricted to 
emergency and service vehicles and weekend parking 
for abutting users. The scale of the street and the 
arrangement and types of planting, lighting, paving 
and furnishings will be designed to create a pedestrian 
ambience along this corridor, which is an important 
link to the north and south campuses. 

The broadwalks on the Quad are also recognized as 
major campus pathways, and should continue to be 
replanted with oak trees to replace the declining 
honeylocusts. Oaks of various species may be used; 
however, their form, scale and texture should be very 
similar. Red, black and white oak can, for example be 
used successfully together. 

Street Tree Planting Program - In order for the streets to 
the east and west of the LAS Core to achieve a high 
spatial quality and be recognized as a part of the 
campus, a major street tree planting program is 
proposed. While the design and massing of architec- 
ture is important to the definition of street spaces, 
trees are the most reliable design means of ensuring 
unity and an appropriate character for campus streets. 
The individual architectural requirements of various 
buildings along a given street are usually too diverse 
to ensure that buildings will be architecturally corn- 
pa table enough to unify the street. Street trees are the 
key to achieving pleasant and visually continuous 
streets. 

Lincoln Avenue is a major campus edge that requires 
special planting treatment. The Master Plan proposes 
that a double row of trees be planted along the west 
side of Lincoln Avenue from Green Street south to 
Illini Grove. This treatment will be similar to the 
President's Walk along University Avenue, where 
buildings are held back 70 feet from the street curb. 

Preferably, new trees should be planted between the 
curb and the sidewalk in a continuous planting strip 



45 




Simple barriers should be used to protect the root 
zone from compaction 




In the future, the Krannert podium will be a 
valuable open space 



not less than 6 feet wide. Trees should not be confined 
to small cut-outs in pavements or exposed to excessive 
pedestrian traffic that will compact soil in the root 
zone. Simple, low barriers should be employeed to 
protect planting strips. 

Streets that constitute discrete spatial units should be 
planted with the same species to ensure continuity of 
form, color and texture for the various avenues and 
spaces that make up the campus. Change of species 
should occur at logical divisions between campus 
spaces and along streets. This will provide visual di- 
versity and protection against disease, while preserv- 
ing the order of the plan. 

Control of Building Placement - The Master Plan locates 
nearly all new facilites within blocks defined by 
existing streets, and employing setbacks and massing 
dimensions established by existing adjoining uses. 
The exception is the Phase I Chemical and Life Sci- 
ences Building that spans California Street creating a 
portal connection to the Krannert Center. In order to 
maintain the spatial continuity of the street, the 
proposed portal would be four stories high and at 
least 50 feet wide. 

The Krannert Podium - As development occurs in the 
area east of the LAS Core, the value of the podium 
landscape surrounding the Krannert Center will 
increase as an open space resource. The podium could 
serve as a major park for the east side of the Central 
Campus. Steps up to the podium from street level 
would be added on the north and south sides of the 
complex and additional steps would be added on the 
east and west sides. A new landscape design for the 
podium would be required to renovate planting and 
surfaces, and to add design features that would make 
the podium an attractive destination. 



46 




Illini Hall 



DESIGN GUIDELINES 



The Master Plan Design Guidelines are a companion 
set of performance criteria to the Master Plan. 
Whereas the role of the Master Plan is to provide a 
diagrammatic framework for open space, circulation, 
use relationships and building placement, the role of 
the design guidelines is to assure that specific designs 
implemented within the Master Plan framework will 
be of a consistently high quality. The guidelines are 
not intended to be so constraining as to stifle analysis 
and judgement and predicate design solutions. 
However, the guidelines should not be interpreted so 
loosely as to permit entirely different initiatives and 
conceptual directions. Their purpose is to achieve a 
balance between the rules set forth and the judge- 
ments that must be exercised at each phase of plan 
development, so that the campus is developed as a 
whole over an extended period of time. The desired 
result is a single integrated campus design in which 
the parts all relate to one another, regardless of when 
they are built. 

The architecture and site design guidelines that 
accompany the North and South Campus master plans 
generally apply to the Central Campus, and should be 
consulted relative to all Central Campus development. 
Since the completion of the South Campus master 
plan, the university has also prepared specific signage 
and lighting guidelines that will apply to all projects in 
the Central Campus. The following guidelines are 
supplementary to the above mentioned documents 
and focus on issues specific to the Central Campus. 



Architecture 




Light color frames are typical on buildings 
around the quadrangle 



The general location, alignment, and size of proposed 
Central Campus buildings is shown in the Illustrative 
Master Plan, Figure 14. 

The North and South Campus master plan guidelines 
cover issues of building unity, location, size, propor- 
tion, shape, color, texture, and transparency. Issues of 
particular concern for the Central Campus will be 
scale and the unity between old and new buildings. 
Scale is a critical issue in the sciences corridor. Unity 
between old and new buildings is a vital concern in 
areas adjacent to the Quadrangle or adjacent to the 
many established traditional buildings east and west 



47 




Unifying roof, David Kinley Hall 




Emphasis of the entrance, Davenport Hall 




Facade ryhthms, Engineering Hall 



of the Quadrangle. Listed below are a number of 
observations regarding how unity and scale have been 
handled in traditional campus buildings. These may 
serve as useful principles in the development of new 
Central Campus buildings. 

• Overall building proportions tend to be 
horizontal. 

• Roofs are used as unifying elements. They 
often include chimneys (Piatt's buildings), 
vents (Noyes Laboratory), or towers (English 
Building) to enliven the character of the roof. 

• Buildings are generally organized into three 
clearly defined parts: base, middle and top. 

• Walls are generally regular planes and read as 
solid walls rather than curtain walls. 

• Walls are frequently subdivided into interest- 
ing patterns created by the rhythmic repetition 
of doors, windows, cornices, dormers and 
changes in material. 

• Compositional emphasis is often assigned to 
main and secondary entrances. 

• Windows are punched windows and usually 
have white or light colored frames. Windows 
are often grouped together to form larger 
visual units that relate well to the overall scale 
of large facades. 

• Facade materials are typically stone and brick. 



Landscape Guidelines 




Window composition, transportation buiUing 



The following is a synthesis of the landscape design 
principles set forth in previous landscape master plans 
by Ferruchio Vitale in the 1920s and Hideo Sasaki in 
the 1960s. Their recommendations for the campus 
landscape continue to be sound advice for the present. 
Both reports should be consulted directly by those 
requiring a more detailed account of their proposals. 
The focus of both of the reports is on planting design 
and the following principles reflect that. The campus 
landscape, however, includes other elements, such as 
lighting; signage; furnishings such as kiosks, litter 
receptacles, and seating; and site improvements such 
as fountains, gateways and sculpture. The North and 



48 



South Campus master plan reports and the campus 
lighting and signage guidelines reports should be 
consulted for these items. 



Principles 

Purposeful Space Definition - The primary purpose of 
planting is to provide coherence and structure to 
campus spaces. 

This notion was promulgated by Vitale in order to 
officially displace the lingering idea that the campus 
should be an arboretum and a home for botanical 
collections and curiosities. The botanical garden idea 
had dominated the campus landscape in the ninteenth 
century and was gradually displaced in the first two 
decades of the twentieth. Sasaki also had to fend off 
the decorative landscape idea in the 1960s in a slightly 
different manifestation. Some plantings around new 
buildings were being designed as "superfluous and 
fussy" external decoration to the buildings, without 
concern for the larger issue of space definition. Sasaki 
reiterated Vitale's message that the purpose of plant- 
ings should be to "define the major spaces and tie 
together the major pathways" of the campus. 

Appropriate Scale - The scale and continuity of plant- 
ings should be in keeping with the size of the campus 
buildings and spaces. 

Vitale worked closely with architects Charles Piatt and 
James White on his landscape master plan. Piatt's 
buildings, and others such as the Armory, were of 
enormous size and aroused a significant fear among 
the architects that the buildings would be too monu- 
mental and overwhelm the individual. Piatt, upon 
seeing his buildings erected on the Illinois campus for 
the first time was reputed to have remarked, "Oh, my 
God! I never realized they were so big." Vitale's idea 
of framing buildings with broad bands of crabapple 
trees and yew hedges arose out of the need to create 
an appropriate scale relationship between massive 
buildings and the individual. This is a device that 
should be used around all large buildings in the 
Central Campus, not just confined to the Quadrangle. 

Appropriate Character - The campus planting design 
should be of a dignified character appropriate to an 
institution of learning. 

Vitale and Sasaki both also emphasized the idea that 



49 



planting should be simple, strong and unified in char- 
acter, eschewing the tendency towards mixing of plant 
species within a single row or spatial unit. Vitale 
stated that "malls and avenues should be planted with 
long-lived native trees, sufficiently diversified to re- 
lieve monotony and insure protection in case of an 
attack by disease upon a species, but not exaggerated 
at the expense of continuity of form, color, and texture 
and of the feeling of restraint and of serenity which is 
the fundamental conception of our design." 

Sasaki, working after the Dutch Elm Disease, stated: 
"Since the experience with the elms has proven that 
the use of any one species of plant exclusively on the 
campus is unwise, an alternate way of recreating the 
overall landscape structure would be to use different 
species of plants for different rows or allees." This ap- 
proach is now being followed on the North Campus 
and should be applied to new plantings and areas 
such as the south quad, where trees have been mixed 
to such an extent that they don't contribute to the 
campus design. The wisdom of mixing tree species to 
avoid catastrophic losses to disease also needs to be 
evaluated recognizing that today's campus trees 
typically only live for 20 to 30 years not 75 to 100 years 
as earlier planners assumed. 

Appropriate Balance - Smaller courtyards, areas of 
informal plantings and accents should be developed 
with small-scale planting to contrast the formal 
dignified planting of the malls and other larger 
campus spaces. 

While Vitale advised that the courtyards and small- 
space plantings need not relate to one another, Sasaki 
recommended that "although all of the courts are 
independent of one another, there should not be too 
drastic a change in character in the treatment of each 
court. Restraint and good taste should be more 
governing in the design of these courts than stylistic 
endeavors, since an institution is extremely long-lived 
and will out-last all but the most enduring designs." 



',u 



"^"S^OFILLINOIS-URBANA 



■III 



3 0112 057630433